Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 2675591

The Podmore case.

Abstract

On January 10, 1929, in Southampton, England, two men examining the interior of a long-padlocked garage that had been previously used as a storeroom by a local agent of the Wolf's Head Oil Company found the decomposing body of its missing agent, Vivian Messiter. The assistance of Scotland Yard was obtained. Sir Bernard Spilsbury's autopsy revealed that Messiter had died from several severe blunt force craniocerebral injuries, the murder weapon apparently being a blood-encrusted hammer found nearby. Suspicion immediately centered on William Podmore, alias William Thomas, who had been employed by Messiter for 3 days in late October 1928, immediately prior to Messiter's being declared missing. Podmore, who was wanted for fraud and robbery elsewhere in England, was questioned and told a self-serving story. Meanwhile, it had been suspected that he had reported to Messiter sales of oil to fictitious customers, collecting commissions on same, and this was eventually reinforced by the finding of traces of writing in a receipt book. Two fellow prisoners of Podmore stated that he had confessed in their presence. Almost 14 months after the murder, Podmore was charged with it. He was later convicted, and was hanged after some public outcry against the verdict.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G K Murphy. 1989. The Podmore case.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000433-198909000-00018

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Health inequalities in Scotland and England: the contrasting journeys of ideas from research into policy.

Both the UK's Labour Government and Scotland's devolved Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition Executive have committed themselves to reducing health inequalities. Furthermore, both institutions have emphasised the importance of using evidence to inform policy responses. In light of such political commitments, a significant amount of work has been undertaken in the field of health inequalities in order to: (i) review the available research evidence; (ii) assess the extent to which policies have been based on this research evidence; and (iii) evaluate the success (or failure) of policies to tackle health inequalities. Yet so far only limited attention has been given to exploring how key actors involved in research-policy dialogues understand the processes involved. In an attempt to address this gap, this article draws on data from semi-structured interviews with 58 key actors in the field of health inequalities research and policymaking in the UK to argue that it is ideas, rather than research evidence, which have travelled from research into policy. The descriptions of the varying journeys of these ideas fit three types--successful, partial and fractured--each of which is outlined with reference to one example. The paper then employs existing theories about research-policy relations and the movement of ideas in an attempt to illuminate and better understand the contrasting journeys. In the concluding discussion, it is argued that the third approach, which focuses on the entrepreneurial processes involved in the marketing of ideas, is most helpful in understanding the research findings, but that this needs to be discussed in relation to the political context within which negotiations take place.

England↗